Hi I'm Philip Newey, author and editor. Here are some thoughts, ideas and other nonsense. I may, at times, express some views that offend some readers. I make no apologies for that. Read on at your own risk. Be sure to also visit my writer's page: http://philipnewey.com. I also run a manuscript services business called All-read-E: http://philipnewey.com/All-read-E.htm

Saturday, June 1, 2013

Beyond Belief

Why does it take more
than a clear, logical argument to change someone’s mind about something? Why do
people cling to a position long after it has ceased to be even plausible? Part
of the reason for this is that people do not entirely trust reason. There is
some justification for this, as what can appear perfectly reasonable at one
time or in one set of circumstances can appear not to be in another. Reason is
not infallible. A reasonable position is to remain open to the possibility that
better reasoning may refute our current position. However, this should not be
used as an excuse for taking a lazier short cut, such as “faith”, for example.
Faith may sometimes serve as a stop gap, until we have stronger evidence either
to support it and turn it into knowledge, or to refute it and search for an
alternative. However, in my opinion, reason always trumps faith. I would
emphasise that reason and logic are not identical. It may be that only purely
intellectual processes can follow the strict rules of logic. The empirical
world is much too “noisy” for pure logic to prevail. However, it is reasonable
to assume, based on the evidence and past experience, that the sun will rise
tomorrow, even though this cannot be demonstrated by means of logic alone. It
is because there is this noise, it is because there are these inevitable gaps
in our empirical knowledge, that faith thinks it can sneak in. It can’t, except
as a stop gap. It is incumbent upon us to fill these gaps by seeking more
information and stronger evidence.

Despite all of this,
and despite our pretentions to the contrary, human beings are not very
rational. We are usually driven, even in our reasoning, by other, less rational
motivations. This is another factor causing people, with some justification, to
distrust reason. However, the fact that people who claim to have a rational
argument for something are sometimes driven by other motivations does not
permit us to believe anything we choose. If we are to overcome our prejudices
and our innate selfishness, we need to be prepared to allow reason to challenge
our beliefs and our assumptions. We will not always do this well. Sometimes we
will do it for misguided reasons. But it is better than the alternatives.

I understand that people
sometimes make a large emotional investment in a belief or set of beliefs. This
is true whether these are religious beliefs, political convictions, or a
self-image. It is difficult to acknowledge that one has been wrong, in these contexts.
In addition, changing our thought patterns requires more energy than simply relaxing
and remaining within our existing patterns. Furthermore, if we were to admit
our mistake, we might appear foolish; and we might feel that we have wasted our
time and energy on something that turned out to be false. As understandable as
this is, it is simply part of our history as a race and as individuals. It is
called “learning”, “growing up”, “maturing”. Being mistaken is not something to
be ashamed of. Clinging to something long after there are good grounds for
doing so perhaps is.